Moral Contradictions

I'm back (and I've moved)

2007-02-28T01:11:00.000-05:00

The time has come - if you so choose, follow me to http://moralcontradictions.org.

Grace and peace,
Nathan

Jesus was a fatty

2006-12-17T21:17:00.000-05:00

This great article, found via Howie Luvzus, is worth five minutes of your time.

Quick Question

2006-12-11T19:19:00.000-05:00

As the end of the semester is so close yet so far away, I recently heard a story that troubled me. No this is not for a final nor is this something recent or currently happening as this occurred 10 years ago.

I'm curious as to how you, as a youth minister, would respond if one of your students confided in you that they smoked pot for the first time. This student is fairly active - not as committed as one would like, but at the same time they are there for most activities and Bible studies. The student is facing college and is obviously recognizes that what they did was wrong and is looking for some sort of guidance.

How would you react? What would you tell the student? What is your objective and rationale in its achievement?

I'll post what happened Wednesday afternoon. There is no one right answer but I want to see if there is any consensus or not.

//This is one way to keep this thing going while I'm crazy-busy - have you all do the work while I finish tests!

Update - First of all, thank you Dusty and Mac for your thoughts. I think both situations would work well if done with an obvious dose of love and intention.

What happened: The youth minister's first response was "well, either you tell your parents or I will - which will it be?". The result is that this particular person has not been in church since.

At what point is a youth minister a friend, and at what point are they a parent? Do they need to be a parent? Do parents look for them to act like one because they do not have the time or desire to do so themselves and expect them to be a miracle worker?

Whichever method of handling the situation is chosen, I believe the common foundation is love for the student and respect for them as young adults. Loving and respecting them means that you can counsel to do the right thing, yet recognize that they must make that choice on their own.

Part of the reason I asked this was because I have been struggling with the divisiveness and lack of love within the Christian tradition. The essence of our faith is Christ, and the essence of Christ is love. If we cannot love our own, how can we be an effective representative of Christ to those who do not know that love?

Thanks again for the answers and thoughts. Feel free to blast away at my mini-sermon... :)

Long time no write

2006-11-26T20:10:00.000-05:00

So yeah, I'm a slacker. Actually, I kind of wish I could say that. The full brunt of seminary has reared its head in the last few weeks, along with job changes and new business ventures.

I started this blog in an attempt to work out feelings and emotions caused by confusion and frustration regarding everything from Baptist life to national politics and everything in between. Moral Contradictions has allowed me the opportunity to connect with new people, new ideas, and it has challenged me to put words to those feelings.

Seminary has taken that challenged and exponentially increased it, but now I'm lucky if I have words to turn in for an assignment. On top of that is a new website design firm specifically for smaller churches and non-profits, a new part-time job, new friends to hang out with, old friends to catch up with, and a mortgage to pay and cat to feed. :)

So for now, as has been unofficially done for the past couple weeks, Moral Contradictions will not receive the attention it needs. If you need to contact me, email me at na than -At--- njwhite.com. (take out the spaces and dashes and replace "At" with the email at sign).

I reserve the right to occasionally post when so led, but who knows when that will happen. I'll have six weeks off and a vacation at Disney in a couple weeks, so we'll see.

Single issue convention

2006-11-14T23:05:00.000-05:00

The Associated Baptist Press reports that North Carolina Baptists have passed the strictest rule against homosexuality and "exclude from convention membership any church thought to affirm homosexual behavior."

Oh nice - "thought" to affirm. That sets a nice precedent to substitute truth for accusations.

A Winston-Salem pastor, Nathan Parrish, notes the irony that the convention moved to narrow the definition of cooperating churches while the Convention met under the theme "Cast a wider net".

What really bothered me was ethics professor Dan Heimbach of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, a member of the recommending committee, "said that although there are many sins, homosexuality is the one challenging the church."

So, does this mean that divorce, adultery, and domestic abuse are not challenging the church, or at the very least not important? Dr. Dan Bagby, professor of marriage and family life at Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond wrote that as a frequent speaker in church, he is aware that:

(a) most Baptist pastors offer no premarital care or counseling to their parishioners; (b) very few Baptist churches require any kind of pre-marital counseling; and (c) most parishioners with whom I am acquainted have no interest in receiving pre-marital counseling (I wrote a book on the subject for pastors).
If we are serious about “protecting marriage” as God intended, why doesn’t someone offer an amendment that would prohibit divorce? That would scare a few more people from taking marriage lightly.
Or, perhaps, offer an amendment that prohibits remarriage? Since both of these are “God’s intention,” why are we not espousing them as state laws to be enforced in Virginia?

I am not saying that homosexuality should not be ignored - rather, I contend that it serves as a smokescreen preventing the church from recognizing true threats to marriage. Another school of thought, to which I agree, argues that a sin is a sin is a sin. Just as Dr. Bagby posits, why shouldn't we start codifying into law decrees against divorce or force all couples into pre-marital counseling?

I don't have any answers to this complex issue, but I'm ready for someone to put forth ideas that don't wreak of hypocrisy and blame passing.

Due Criticism

2006-11-13T21:45:00.000-05:00

I often criticize those from the right about misrepresenting Christianity, but Brian Kaylor over at For God's Sake Shutup! points out an outrage from the left: the Church of England calling for killing severely disabled babies at birth.

No.

No.

No.

*sigh*

No.

Real Family Values

2006-11-13T10:42:00.000-05:00

Ethics Daily has an article about a Baptist in North Carolina who ran an improbable campaign against the incumbent Republican. Larry Kissell of Biscoe, NC, was not offered any national Democratic money, yet the race is still undecided.

I admire his definition of family values, especially after 12 years of Republicans only relegating their family values to election time.

"Our families deserve more than empty moral posturing from an incumbent that votes to reduce efforts to collect child support for struggling families, makes it more difficult to obtain student loans and goes out of his way to vote for torture," he said. "The hard working families of the 8th District and our nation deserve a commitment to education, economic opportunity, civil rights, personal freedoms and the safe, clean environment that we all want for our families.

"We've had enough of the nonsense from the incumbent aristocracy in D.C. that has proven they'd rather wedge us apart than bring us together. It's time for an honest debate on real family values."

Yes, family values such as protecting unborn babies is critical, but the definition of pro-life does not stop there. The goal of simply protecting life is unfulfilled when these children do not have health insurance, grow up in abusive homes, do not have access to adequate public schools, and are not educated about how to become productive members of society.

If the government is charged with protecting life, then it should be allowed to protect those who are born. We need more candidates like Kissell in both parties who live in the real world.

Wolves 1, Sheeps 0

2006-11-04T22:51:00.000-05:00

"Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." Matthew 10:16.

I didn't think the wolves would be fellow Christians.

Via Raw Story and Time, David Kuo has some excellent thoughts which bear honest consideration:

"At the end of the day, this comes down to bringing Jesus into politics," he says. "Right now, it's not Ted Haggard on trial. It's Jesus. This is about the God he represents. When you make yourself a public figure and you fall, you bring the perception of your God with you."
"Jim Dobson's response was particularly telling," Kuo says of leading evangelical James Dobson. "He basically blamed the controversy on gays and Democrats. When evangelical leaders can't see beyond Tuesday on any question, what on earth is happening?"

What's happening is the perversion of the gospel by those who become consumed with themselves, their quest for power, their cultural values, and seem to believe that their interpretation of the Constitution was left out of their Bible.

Apparently a sin is not a sin if it hurts politically. Kinda sucks to compromise your faith simply because you put God in your own box, right?

Actually, it sucks for me because instead of telling others about the Gospel I have to explain the lies and dispel the deception and hypocrisy spread by these folks. Thank you, Dr. Dobson, for making our job that much harder.

Luckily, God is bigger than all of us, and He will prevail when it's all said and done. Why can't we all be happy just working for God's will instead of trying to dictate it to Him?

Response to letter writer

2006-11-04T21:43:00.000-05:00

I would send this to the Religious Herald, but it won't be printed in time for the election. Read what prompted me to write this response.

Dear Mr. Coburn,

You are most certainly entitled to your opinion, however I must disagree with your narrow definition of biblical standards. Certainly abortion and homosexuality are important issues in which Christians must engage, but I would be slower than you to assign God and His Holy Word to a specific party.

When I read the Bible, some standards that stand out in addition to the two you identified are:

Working against Poverty (Blessed are the meek)
Working for justice (Jeremiah, Micah, Gospels, etc)
Ending corruption of power (early Israelite Kings...)
Preaching against the love of materialism (Gospels)
Working for good stewardship of the Earth (Genesis)

Those are just some that quickly come to mind. Issues that face voters Tuesday of which Christians must engage are:

Rampant governmental corruption
The deficit and its ramifications for our children
Hypocrisy by religious leaders
Thousands of deaths in an unjust and dubious war
The growing gap of the richer getting richer while the poor are, well, in relation, getting poorer
Off-shoring off millions of American jobs overseas
Lack of health insurance and education opportunities for millions of Americans
AIDS and other health issues throughout the world
People in our own country unable to pay for energy bills or food

We Christians have a tremendous opportunity to speak to a wide host of issues and work not only for two moral issues, but for a wide range of issues that include deep moral and ethical questions.

The Bible speaks to much more than abortion and homosexuality. Those two issues may seem the most critical to you, but I daresay they are not that important to those who work two jobs to pay for food or health insurance, or those who pray their kids don't get sick so they won't miss work and risk getting fired, or to those who just moved out of homelessness and cannot afford furniture for their new apartment in the projects.

We are called to have the faith of a child, but even a child can see homeless people on the side of the road needing a representative of God to send a loving word and some help.

Ditto

2006-11-04T19:54:00.000-05:00

I have to agree with Mike...

The American church is apostate - it's sold out to power, consumerism, unchecked capitalism, and ignores injustice. Oh yeah, it's also latched arms with a corrupt government.

I'm a Christian and I'm a an American, and I'm ashamed of not only what's been done, but not done, under those labels.

Wealth Redistribution

2006-11-03T14:40:00.000-05:00

On earlier posts I've been accused of advocating wealth distribution even though I was not, in fact, saying that nor insinuating it. However, Bill Moyers connected a few dots in my head in that he says that wealth redistribution is already occurring. It's just that the wealth is concentrating more at the top as opposed to the bottom, and intentional steps have been enacted to make it so.

Over the past few years I've experienced folks who live in their own reality. They make over six figures, drive whatever car they want, go to whatever school they want, live wherever they want, and vacation where they want. They cannot fathom that others simply do not have those choices and how that affects them. They operate in a world within a world and thus develop a blind spot to those less fortunate than them. Government is not just a nuisance, but a must to survive. Should it be that way? No.

If the GOP is truly concerned with family values, then they should move away from defining them in terms of protecting children from sex education, the "homosexual agenda", and start defining them in assuring adequate education for all.

If the GOP is truly concerned with family values, then they should move away from defining them in terms of protecting marriage by 'stopping the gays' to defining them in protecting them from the effects of no health insurance, higher living costs, lower wages, and a crumbling infrastructure.

What good is our country if abortion, stem-cell research, and homosexuality is stopped and middle class families cannot afford to go to the doctor? Can't afford to visit Grandma in Tennessee because of high gas prices or can't take time off for fearing of being fired and replaced? Can't afford to not have both parents work and have one home after school? (It's well known in my hometown that most of the immoral debauchery decried by parents occurs in the 2-3 hours after school before the parents get home.)

I was ashamed the lack of concern for those without as my wife and I moved up through the middle class to upper-middle class. Having everything I wanted jaded me, I hate to admit, and I don't ever want that to happen again. I can understand how many people who have never gone without what they wanted or needed can simply not see the systematic problems our country is facing today. Our country is breaking, and something must be done, or we will face a day of reckoning. And no, we cannot assume Jesus Christ is coming tomorrow, so yes, we must work on a solution.

Does this sound shrill and alarmist? Probably. However, we as Christians, in good conscience, cannot just wink at the status quo and ignore the injustice all around us. However we address it, individually, through churches, or through government, we should not be afraid to challenge the excesses of runaway capitalism. Remember, we live in a democracy first, where all are created equally.

I could go on and on and on. Thanks to Bruce at Mainstream Baptist, Bill Moyers can write a much more erudite essay expressing my feelings. It's long, but it's a great read. I'm still critically chewing on it, but still, I can readily agree with the gist of it. We must open our eyes to what's going on, and until we do, nothing will be solved about the income distribution that's already happening.

When you're done, take a gander through the book of Jeremiah and see what happens to an unjust society. For those who like the read the Bible in apocalyptic terms, find anything interesting about the fact that the Babylonians are the ones conquering the country? :)

I'm not the only one

2006-11-02T21:44:00.000-05:00

Via Raw Story,

According to the Allen camp's logic, God would be a pedophile, too. After all, we Christians believe God inspired the Bible. And God-the-author chose to include the "sleazy" story about Lot offering to send out his young virgin daughters to be raped by the men of Sodom

The Bible has masturbation scenes, rape, pedophilia and God's favorite man – King David – warming himself with a young virgin in his old age. He's the same man God tells us committed murder after he indulged his peeping Tom fantasies.

Lucky for God-the-author that He's not running against George Allen.

The rest of the opinion column relates a story of another fed up Christian who identified with the Republican party for years, but finally threw in the towel after George Allen's latest shameless and desperate smear.

I'm at the point where I'd vote for a rock instead of George Allen.

A little bit of my perspective

2006-11-01T16:51:00.000-05:00

I was 12 years old in 1994. I remember Bill Clinton being sworn in 2 years earlier. The word Democrat was a bad word in my house as my parents were God-fearing Southern Baptists who voted Republican every time. Or at least I perceived that as so. I remember an excitement building among my parents and my church as the low of a Democrat in the White House started rising to a high with Republicans having a chance at taking the House. The three words that kept being repeated over and over everywhere were "Contract with America".

I don't remember specific conversations or articles or whatever - I was 12 after all. The feeling that stayed with me was the perception that Republicans were orders of magnitude morally higher than Democrats. If they were elected, this country would be so much better than it was.

My best friend's parents were Democrats and I just did not understand how. I mean, they were good people - nice people - so why didn't they vote Republican? Hadn't they heard just how bad the Democrats were? Why weren't they voting for the Republicans?

My most critical and formative years were between 1994 and 2000, between 12 and 18. During those years I took a Civics class in 8th grade when all my friends began their language. I got a 99 in AP US History and a 5 on that test, as well as an A in AP US Government and Comparative Government, taught in the same year and same class period, and got a 5 on both tests. I read the newspaper as much as I could. I was somewhat of a politics junkie.

I was immensely proud that the current Speaker of the House of Delegates in Virginia attended my church. I would brag about it at school, as if anyone cared. I would follow the news out of Richmond as well as DC. Being in the Washington television area, national news was local news, and the shock and appall surrounding Monica-gate absorbed me and my family. Everything around me exuded Christian-right, Republican politics and beliefs. Everything.

Until those three words "Contract with America" started creeping back in my awareness around the time I started college. Republicans gained the White House and a couple years later gained the Senate as well, solidifying control of DC. My childhood experiences told me this was a good thing, especially in the wake of 9/11.

As we've seen in the past few years, with the ill-planning and questionable means used for war in Iraq, lack of response during Katrina, sex scandal cover-ups in Congress, Enron and other companies collapsing, Big Oil taking in the biggest profits ever, gas prices increasing as housing costs go up, ethics committees neutered as corruption abounded, issues that are supposed to be engaged through faith rather than culture or discrimination, on and on and on and on...

...I've had enough.

TWICE Republicans have beat their chests and said 'we are morally righteous and so much better than those Democrats", once in 1994 after 40 years of one-party rule, and once in 2000 following the aftermath of the Lewinsky affair. TWICE I bought into it. TWICE I believed that they really were the party that represented my beliefs and of upstanding moral values.

TWICE now I've been let down. I've had enough.

A post over at Crooks and Liars prompted me to read through the 1994 Contract With America. Read it for yourself and compare it with how Republicans are acting now.

Please do not read this as cynicism - I'm talking about the atmosphere in which I grew up. This is just my perspective, which I believe is as valid as any others' perspective.

Are all Republicans bad? No. Are all Democrats bad? No. Will I ever fully trust a political party to do what it says and "buy into" their platform as morally superior than another? No. I have to try hard to not repeat the same mistakes with Democrats now than I did with Republicans in 1994. I hope they will make changes, and I think they will. Am I getting my hopes up? No. Something tells me I'm destined to be a freaky Independent who votes for the opposite party every 4-8 years.

To conclude, who says history is useless? Let's go back to September 27, 1994, when 367 GOP House candidates signed this Contract on the steps of the US Capitol at the unveiling of their promise to America should they win the House.

They pledged: "If we break this Contract, throw us out".

Do what they told us to do.

A quote

2006-10-26T21:55:00.000-04:00

I came across a quote in one of my classes pulled from the October 16, 2006 edition of Time. Karen Tumulty, in the article "The End of a Revolution" says that:

Every revolution begins with the power of an idea and ends when clinging to power is the only idea left.

I could not help but think of the long view of the history of Baptists in the South. United with the fantastic idea of taking the Gospel to others beyond our borders, the largest incarnation of that group is sacrificing members by narrowing parameters for cooperation to cling to the idea of power.

I'm currently writing here as an excuse not to work on my 20 page paper for Christian Tradition. The point our textbook's author pounds is that Christ must remain at the center of the church. One essence, many forms. My understanding of how to practice my faith varies with other Christians, and that's okay, as long as Christ is the focus.

The day we succumb to temptation and put ourselves in the center is the day we are in trouble.

It's their fault

2006-10-26T14:48:00.000-04:00

Republicans are upset at leaks concerning Justice Department probes into alleged corruption because they could threaten their majority.

As the age-old maxim goes (also a Biblical one), power corrupts. Unchecked power vested in one party, yet again, has resulted in the quagmire of morality that is Washington DC. Only this time it didn't take a impressionable intern.

I don't see what the anger is about concerning the Justice Department's investigations - if nothing was done wrong and there isn't anything to hide, then Republicans shouldn't worry, should they?

(Via Raw Story)

Literal contradictions

2006-10-25T15:58:00.000-04:00

While taking a break from my Christian Tradition paper I am catching up on some of my blog reading. I am literally 1,000 posts behind as more are added everyday. While trying to knock that number down, something connected in my little brain. I may be totally off-base, but bear in mind that I am asking a question and do not have an answer yet.

The majority of Christians believe in transubstiation; in other words, when the bread and the wine are blessed at communion they become the literal body of Christ. Contrary to the triumphant Baptist tradition in which I was raised, this may be a shock to some as many are used to viewing this act in a symbolic manner. Unlike the Roman Catholic tradition, the Orthodox church has not tried to explain this belief - it's a matter of faith and though I disagree, I admire them.

The majority of current Southern Baptists along with Christians of other conservative denominations hold fast to the unbiblical word "inerrant", believing that the Holy Spirit, acting as God, used humans as a vehicle to move the pen on the scroll and write down the Holy Scriptures. In their circles, it's not enough to say the Bible is authoritative, inspired, and something to treasure, live by, and faithfully study. One must speak the word 'inerrant' as much as possible for a ticket of acceptance, else folks like myself are accused of not believing the Bible. Nevermind that word is not found in the Bible or in the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, but whatever floats your boat.

I'm getting beyond myself, but the point is this: How is transubstiation dismissed as impossible, yet complete divine authorship is readily accepted?

In my mind, transubstiation has a Biblical edge when the statement "this is my body" is literally read, whereas "this book is without error" cannot be found. (Disclaimer: I have not taken Hebrew or Greek yet, so maybe I have a "liberal" translation or don't know enough yet to find it).

Furthermore, I have not taken a theology class yet, so maybe it's easier to believe that the Holy Spirit prefers human vehicles as opposed to those made of starch and alcohol and I am simply an ignorant fool.

Even though us Baptists believe the elements are symbols rather than actual flesh and blood, we still hold the act of communion in high regard - so high we usually only do it once a month so as to not take it for granted. To my knowledge, no one accuses us of not believing in Jesus' sacrifice because we do not believe the literal words of Jesus and agree with those who do.

Thus, if limiting the Holy Spirit's power in symbolizing communion does not take away from the meaning and importance of the act, why do some folks consistently dismiss those who disagree with the method of inspiration of the Bible as not believing the Bible? To me, saying the Bible is authoritative, inspired, and worthy of studying and living out is on the same level as considering communion as a holy sacrament despite disagreeing with the Catholic and Orthodox belief of the Holy Spirit's literal interaction with the ceremony.

Does that question make sense? I am merely trying to read the Bible for what it says and not assume I know what it says (or should say). I know it is impossible to be objective, but it is also impossible to be perfect, yet we are called to strive towards perfection.

Please bear with my ignorance and slight sarcasm, but my brain threw up a "Compare and Contrast" flag and I'm just throwing it out there.

A snapshot of all that has gone wrong in Iraq

2006-10-21T23:01:00.000-04:00

We all know things have gone wrong in Iraq, but with the number of soldier's deaths increasing and God knows how many Iraqis' killed, Bill Maher has some advice for the 'think-tanks' that painted such a rosy picture to convince America that this war was necessary. Take it or leave it, but I had a hard time disputing his rationale.

Via Crooks and Liars:

And finally, new rule in two parts: (A) You can't call yourself a think tank if all your ideas are stupid; and (B) If you're someone from one of these think tanks that dreamed up the Iraq War and who predicted that we'd be greeted as liberators, and that we wouldn't need a lot of troops, and that Iraqi oil would pay for the war, that the WMD's would be found, that the looting wasn't problematic, that the mission was accomplished, that the insurgency was in its last throes, that things would get better after the people voted, after the government was formed, after we got Saddam, after we got his kids, after we got Zarqawi, and that whole bloody mess wouldn't turn into a civil war, you have to stop making predictions.

This is wrong

2006-10-20T21:57:00.000-04:00

I interrupt my vacation to state that this is wrong.

Helping the hungry on base - Many military familes rely on donated goods.

(h/t Waldo Jaquith)

Truth, truths, and a post!

2006-10-18T12:23:00.000-04:00

I really do miss writing here, but one thing I'm learning is that I have to get my reading and writing done at odd times. Today is a great example - I was reading a book for class while waiting for an oil change and saw a couple things that sparked my interest. Now I find myself at home typing over a cat on my lap, trying to get this done before we pack up to go to the beach for fall break.

I have started way too many projects and am trying to tie some of them up while a couple are on hold. I recently went down to part-time at my job, allowing me some more free time, which I hope will be reflected here. I'm starting some sort of hybrid ministry/business that will help churches obtain an easy-to-manage and affordable (and attractive!) website. I firmly believe that this can be a vital tool for ministry and outreach, especially to the 6 out of 10 former youth group members who have fallen away from the church.

So the mission and focus of this web design shin-dig I'm starting up is one thing that's on my mind, so the part of the book that stood out to me goes along with that as well as other ideas and thoughts, if you can call them thoughts, that float around in my head.

The book is Soul Searching, The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers by Christian Smith. The author is a sociologist who loves numbers and charts a bit too much, but the following two things struck me and I'm not sure if they're related.

First, there's a chart detailing the percentages of youth ages 13-17 who currently consider themselves non-religious and lists the faith tradition in which they grew up. Three main Christian categories exist: Catholic, Protestant, and "Just Christian". The Just Christian category, in the author's mind, represents youths where church attendance was nominal. 22% of non-religious youths were Catholic, 22% Protestant, and 20% Just Christian.

The Protestant category is broken down by denomination, and Baptists represent 9%, or 41% of identified Protestants. 9% of youth today who consider themselves non-religious were raised Baptist.

This simply could be due to the sheer volume of Baptists in the country, as Luthern is second place at 4% and Methodist and Pentecostal at 2%. Whatever the reason, it is not something to be proud of and needs to be recognized.

Next was a quote by a non-religious 17 year old interviewed for the project and book. He had a pretty good life going, although it was hard for awhile, and was raised as a nominal Catholic. One observation he made during the conversation about his turn-offs from church was "I often see people get stuck into trying to find the truth in religion and they shut out the world around them."

I had two professors and a Bible study leader in the past two days discuss Truth versus many truths, and thus I've been wrestling with this whole Truth deal. In our post-modern age, many folks subscribe to a notion that what works for others may not work for them, and that's fine. Many in the evangelical side cling to Truth and approach evangelism with a "here's what you don't have, I have it, and you need it" mentality. Bible bashers - with the love of Jesus, of course. That tactic does not have much chance succeeding when put against a person who believes in multiple truths. You lose their respect, you come across as arrogant, and any chance of seed-planting is gone.

Now, I'm not saying good-ole evangelism should cease - I believe it still has a place at the table for outreach as many folks are looking for a solid and firm answer. However, there are multiple forms of evangelism, and one way is to engage folks where they are at and then share stories of God's work and help them come to Christ.

I'm hoping this little web thing I'm starting on the side will help reach out to folks who live a big chunk of their lives online. Tactics that worked 50 years ago, 25 years ago, or even 5 years ago need to be re-thought - not for the sake of merely trying something new for the novelty of the thing or to disrespect tradition, but we need to re-evaluate their effectiveness, as well as their theology. Website outreach is one way of evangelism that needs to be fully understood and utilized.

So yeah - Truth, many truths, and how to convey Christ in a post-modern world. Who said this was easy? :)

As Forrest Gump says: that's all I have to say about that.

Unjust allies

2006-10-17T10:33:00.000-04:00

I am continually struck at the blind allegiance many Christians give to political parties. Certainly today we hear more about the Religious Right as their party is currently in control of both Congress and the White House, but Democrats cannot be excluded from this wide-sweeping statement.

Usually this allegiance is given by the promise to fulfill their particular intrepretation of the Bible. All that makes the news seems to be abortion and homosexuality, issues that must be engaged, but often at the expense of the rest of the Bible's teachings. Often times Christians in opposite parties, in a reactionary way, totally ignore the pet issues of Christians in the other party, no matter the Biblical justification.

By sticking with one party, Biblical teachings will be compromised. There is no way around that. Christians who align themselves with Democrats yet are against abortion may sometimes feel unwelcome at party gatherings. Likewise, Christians who identify with the GOP may not speak out, or worse, champion the excesses of the corporate wing of the party.

Today in the church, too often the Old Testament and Prophets are at best ignored and at worst maligned. In Jeremiah, we know that God is not happy with His people, but often times the reason why is not explored, or Jeremiah is merely used as a tool to point to Christ or the an apocalypse. Jeremiah's temple speech commands that:

For if you truly amend your ways and your doings, if you truly act justly one with another, if you do not oppress the alien, the orphan, and the widow, or shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not go after other gods to your own hurt, then I will dwell with you in this place, in the land that I gave of old to your ancestors for ever and ever.

Amos goes on to proclaim "Seek good and not evil, that you may live; and so the LORD, the God of hosts, will be with you, just as you have said. Hate evil and love good, and establish justice in the gate;..."(5:14-15a).

Of course the prophet Micah reminds us that "He has told you, O mortal, what is good; what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?"(6:8).

We know that God judges and that he abhors sin, but we cannot simply gloss over those teachings of the Old Testament. If we are to believe in the entire Bible, we must wrestle with these commands and not simply dismiss them with some sort of convienent theology.

Likewise, we must have the courage like the prophets and boldly proclaim what God commands us to say and do. Sure the prophets are immortalized in the Holy Bible forever, but they were not especially popular people back in their time. Even when Jerusalem was under siege, Jeremiah was in jail because he was considered a traitor for suggesting that Judah would pay for its sins.

God cannot be confined to one political party. The Bible cannot be the sole property and interpretation of one political party. Why has this happened? My layman's view is that it's too easy - vote at the polls for the politicians that speak your language and God will be pleased. There's no committment, no cross to bear, no narrow path - just show up at the polls once every other November and your duty is done.

I would love for someone to point out in the Bible where it says that following God is easy. The Bible was not dropped from heaven as some sort of rulebook or clear-cut guideline - we have to wrestle with all the teachings and understand what they say. We cannot pick and choose abortion and homosexuality or focus only on poverty and the suffering - if we say we believe in the Bible, we must read it with an open mind to see what it really says, and not what we want it to say. We must read the entire Bible, or else we pervert what God may be actually saying by attempting to think for Him.

We must engage all the issues and not sell out Biblical teachings so that we may curry political favor. I pick mainly on the GOP because they're currently in power, and we've witnessed how power can corrupt (which is another theme in the Old Testament that's routinely ignored, but we'll save that for later). Else, we may ignorantly find ourselves committing the same errors as the ancient Israelites which drew God's wrath.

Is there any surprise?

2006-10-14T12:11:00.000-04:00

I have been saying since I started this blog that evangelical Christians who put their faith in President Bush were simply being used to gain political power. Any objective person who merely glanced at the news in the last six years could see all the talk about how important they were as the "base", yet most of the benefits went to the corporate and military wing of the party. How's that for irony?

I started writing this blog not to attack these Christian conservatives, as I share some of their beliefs. Rather, I wanted to expose my belief that their unquestionable faith (which they're starting to question, finally) in DC was misguided and even idolatrous.

Big Daddy Weave has a great clip from the Keith Olbermann show detailing David Kuo's book called "Tempting Faith", a book that I want to read.

President Bush has let you down - God never will. Remember, there's a difference.

Newt and I agree again

2006-10-05T14:07:00.000-04:00

I saw this quote concerning the sex scandals of late from the esteemed (*cough cough *) Newt Gingrich:

"What we don't have to do is allow our friends on the left to lecture us on morality," Gingrich said at a party fundraiser in Greenville. "There's a certain stench of hypocrisy."

That's a valid point. I mean, if it was so easy to listen to members of your own party preach to the left on morality, only to suffer the indignation of having it thrown back at you, I would be upset. Really, when you stand on the pulpit above everyone else, you get to point out the problems of others while condemning those that recognize the same problems within your party.

So yes, clearly the stench of hypocrisy stems from the left. Clearly.

Seriously, how do authentic Christians, who strive to follow Jesus daily, swallow this bull? Will the real Christian statesman please stand up?

Update: Thank you Steve B for the George Will link. Will says it much better than I can:

Their story, of late, has been that theirs is the lonely burden of defending all that is wholesome. But the problem with claiming to have cornered the market on virtue is that people will get snippy when they spot vice in your ranks.

Will goes on: "His [Mark Foley's] behavior was disgusting, and some Republican reactions seem more calculating than indignant." Someone tried to preach to me that what separated Republicans from Democrats was not that Republicans claimed to hold a higher standard only to abuse the public trust, but rather dealt more swiftly with errant members. We're finding that out to be untrue, and I'm sure a little investigative work would turn up more examples.

I cannot count how many times I have heard ministers, politicians, and everyone else preach that morals are not relative, but absolute. How is comparing one party's morals to the others absolute? We may have messed up, but not as bad as them. Why not say we messed up, period? Only until the sin is fully acknowledged and blame accepted can forgiveness and atonement occur.

The Republican Party has no one to blame but itself. It has turned into the monster it has repeatedly condemned and feared, and only objective analysis and soul searching will allow them to swallow the consequences and attempt to restore its integrity and move on. Else, the shear level of cynicism toward American politics, not to mention Christians, which is my main focus, will burst through the roof, and everyone loses.

Adjusting

2006-10-04T19:59:00.000-04:00

My world has been fundamentally altered forever within the last three months, so I beg forgiveness that I have not been able to write here as much as I want to. Not to delve too personally, but I'm dealing with:

Starting seminary

Changing churches

Re-evaluating my current employment

Finding personal and marriage time

All while this is going on, I've stumbled across some unexpected feelings dealing with the incredible amount of transition we are undergoing. It was unexpected because, well, I didn't expect it, but reflecting on it I should have. I do not know too many people that can handle all that in a smooth manner.

I anticipate working through it with no problem. I thank God for a strong marriage in which I can honestly communicate what's going on without fear of retribution or rejection. I also thank God for being God and being patient with my rambling prayers as well as being a comforter and peace-giver.

Suffice to say that my head will stop spinning and be on straight at some point, and we'll see if I can give more attention to this little project.

I must say that I am unsure if this is coming at an inconvenient or convenient time with all the happenings in the news. Soon I do want to hash out an opinion on the Virginia constitutional amendment being proposed. This whole Mark Foley deal just upsets me as more details come out about the lack of inaction all around. Additionally, the culture of corruption, lying, and half-truths wears on me, so for once I feel grateful for being allowed to stick my head in the sound and deal with personal issues.

Anyways, thanks for faithfully stopping by even though it has been slow. I always say I hope it picks up, but truthfully I cannot say that for sure. God bless.

Those who work yet do not receive

2006-09-30T21:59:00.000-04:00

Between working full-time and going to school full-time, I'm a little behind the times. I read an article a few days ago the Richmond Times-Dispatch which impressed on me again that those who go without health insurance are not just the poor - they are the working poor.

I applaud the commonwealth for its efforts in trying to decrease the rate of uninsured children. Currently 1 in 11 go without health insurance.

I really don't know what the solution, if it feasibly exists, should be. However, I do know some things:

A. Again, this is a moral issue that receives short-shrift because the emotional gut-reaction is not widespread.
B. Healthy children grow up to be healthy adults, and thus can contribute more to society and have a better chance of attending college and obtaining substantial employment. The article mentions the risks of skipping routine check-ups.
C. This is not a class issue: 70 percent of uninsured children come from families where the income level is twice the level of poverty, or $33,200 for a family of three.
D. This is not a race issue: In Virginia, 27 percent are African-American and 17 percent are Hispanic - totalling 44 percent.

"These findings destroy some of the stereotypes that exist," Pollack said.

Families USA said that despite gains in enrolling children with insurance, the rate of uninsured children has increased since 1998. And there are wide disparities from state to state.

In Virginia, 9 percent are uninsured, while in Texas the percentage is more than 20 percent.

The figures suggest that uninsured children will represent a huge cost burden as time goes by. For instance, less than half experienced a well-child visit in the past year. Uninsured children are three times more likely to have unmet mental-health needs and nine times more likely to have other unmet or delayed medical needs.

How do we as Christians address this issue?

Family values...

2006-09-30T09:37:00.000-04:00

"It's vile," said Rep. Mark Foley, R-West Palm Beach. "It's more sad than anything else, to see someone with such potential throw it all down the drain because of a sexual addiction."

No, this wasn't said about himself, after resigning from Congress Friday because of improper emails with a 16 year old boy, this was in relation to President Clinton.

What happened to the Republicans? Have they no shame? Where did this whole 'we'll restore dignity to the White House and DC' go?

With Rep. Bob Ney's conviction regarding corruption and the whole Jack Abramoff scandal, not to mention Tom Delay's resignation, I was told that sort of behavior was impossible, for these were good Christian men.

Shame on those Christians who claim that Jesus would vote Republican, or for those who cast Democrats out of their churches.

How is this a Christian value?

How is justifying torture a Christian value?

How is lying to the country to justify war a Christian value?

How is corruption a Christian value?

How is ignoring American and International law a Christian value?

And for Virginia and the illegal immigration debate, how is racism a Christian value?

I guess this is what happens when you present yourself as holier-than-thou... anytime you set yourself up higher than humans and closer to God, gravity's humbling mechanicism kicks in.

Update: Just saw that Foley was the chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. Nice.